Tom Harkin

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. If I have the correct one?

Mr. HARKIN. I would say to my friend--if the chairman will yield so I can respond?

Mr. HARKIN. That is correct.

Mr. HARKIN. I thank the chairman. The chairman is a leader and is very fair himself. I have no objection to moving to something else.

Mr. HARKIN. I am told he's the second most popular conservative talk show. I don't know where that falls in. The first two are Shultz and Franken. They are more on the progressive side, no doubt about that. The third one you mention is on the conservative side, I guess. I don't know that so I cannot speak authoritatively on that. I don't know how that balance works out after that. I don't know. I know my information--and it is really secondhand; I can't say this firsthand--is that the ``Ed Shultz Show'' was contacted to be on. Then he was recontacted saying that he was not to be on. And it is sort of in kind of a state of limbo now. I don't understand what that is all about.

Mr. HARKIN. As I read the Inhofe amendment, all it says is that: The Secretary of Defense may appoint an individual to serve as ombudsman . . . to act as an intermediary between the staff of the American Forces Network and the Department of Defense, military commanders, and listeners to the programming of the American Forces Network. That is all it says. It doesn't say what his duties are. My amendment specifically says that the ombudsman will do these things: Appointed by the Secretary of Defense for a term of 5 years; not engage in any prebroadcast censorship; conduct regular reviews of the integrity, balance and fairness; respond to program issues raised by the audience regarding the network's programming; refer complaints to AFR management; make suggestions regarding ways to correct imbalances; and prepare an annual report both to the SECDEF and Congress. So my amendment spells out what the ombudsman should do. The Inhofe amendment does not.

Mr. HARKIN. The way the amendment is written, the Secretary has full discretion. He can go outside or stay inside.

Mr. HARKIN. If the Senator would yield, I will respond. I am familiar with the first two. Who is the third one?

Mr. HARKIN. I will yield 1 minute 46 seconds more to the Senator from North Dakota.

Mr. HARKIN. I yield myself a couple of minutes because I want to save some time. A little history is in order here. In 1993, then-Representative Robert Dornan of California, along with 69 other Republican House Members, sent a letter to Secretary of Defense Les Aspin demanding that Limbaugh's radio show and his television show be broadcast to the military. The Pentagon at that time pointed to an internal survey they had done of 50,000 military listeners. They found that only 4 percent requested more talk shows. The overwhelming number of respondents requested continuous music, as you might expect from our people in uniform. However, the issue kept getting pressed. On November 29, 1993, the American Armed Forces Radio issued this statement. This is their statement. The Rush Limbaugh show makes no pretense that his show is balanced. If AFRTS scheduled a program of personal commentary without balancing it with another viewpoint, we would be open to broad criticism that we are supporting a particular point of view. They went ahead and put Rush Limbaugh on the air. But the point is, that is all right, but they have done nothing to balance it in the intervening time. There is an amendment that I believe is going to be offered by Senator Inhofe--at least he was talking about it earlier. We will talk about more later if, indeed, he does offer it. But getting back to this point on the National Public Radio, I don't think you will ever hear NPR in its commentary say that the Abu Ghraib prison abuse was a fraternity prank or the humiliation of the inmates there `` . . . was a brilliant maneuver, no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation at Yale.'' I don't think you will ever hear NPR in its commentary describe images of torture as ``pictures of homo-eroticism that looks like standard, good old American pornography.'' This is all that Rush Limbaugh said. You won't hear that on NPR. Last, a group called Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting analyzed the political affiliation of guests appearing last summer on NPR's most popular news shows. Republicans outnumbered Democrats on NPR by 61 percent to 38 percent. So I rest my case that NPR is nothing like the Rush Limbaugh show. I yield the floor.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, how much time is remaining on my side?

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, what we have is a policy that is not written down--we can find it nowhere, and today is the first time I ever heard of it--that somehow before American Forces Radio airs a program, No. 1, it has to be syndicated and, No. 2, it has to have a million listeners. I never heard of this before. All of a sudden, it has come up.

Mr. HARKIN. Since I am on my time, the Senator can get his own time to respond. That is why we need to codify it. I think the Senator has put his finger on it. That is why our amendment is necessary. It takes the DOD directive, what is in writing, and codifies it and makes it law. That way there won't be any confusion. That way we will know whether they are living up to their own words. Secondly, putting in an ombudsman-- not ``may,'' what the Senator says in his amendment--will do the following: That person will be appointed by the Secretary of Defense; not engage in any censorship; conduct reviews of integrity, balance, and fairness; respond to program issues raised by the audience; make suggestions regarding ways to correct imbalances; and, most importantly, prepare and present an annual report to the Secretary of Defense and Congress on whether American Forces Radio is satisfying its mandate to provide fair and balanced political programming. The Senator, by his own words, shows why this is necessary. All of a sudden we hear there is a policy. It is not written down. We have never heard of it before. Yet we know what is happening. I repeat for emphasis: On the 33 stations around the world, we have 100 percent Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Laura and James Dobson, and zero percent of any kind of progressive radio. I don't care how you cut it, slice it, dice it, or excuse it, this is unfair. This is censorship. This is propagandizing our troops. They deserve better than that. I yield the floor.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, this is very interesting, I say to my friend from Oklahoma. The Senator from Virginia got up earlier before our lunch break and said something about Ed Schultz and Al Franken being on American Forces Radio. I just checked with them. I had my office call both of their programmers. Neither Mr. Franken nor Mr. Schultz has been notified, as of 2 hours ago, that they are ever going to be on American Forces Radio. They have never been notified. So now we hear today that somehow all of a sudden they are going to be on. Maybe the Senator has some inside knowledge of how they operate. As of 2 hours ago, neither Mr. Schultz nor Mr. Franken has been notified when they are going to be on, how often, or how long. The second thing I say to my friend from Oklahoma, he says they have this policy of syndication and 1 million listeners and even though it is not written down anywhere they have followed it. I say to my friend from Oklahoma, if that is the case, then why don't they carry Howard Stern? Howard Stern has over 8 million listeners. He is syndicated. Yet American Forces Radio will not carry Howard Stern. So I say to my friend from Oklahoma, there must be some other criteria other than syndication and a million listeners or else they certainly would have Howard Stern. I yield the floor.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, what we have coming up here are two votes, one at 2:45 on the Inhofe sense-of-the-Senate amendment, to be followed by a vote on my amendment. Now, you might say: What harm is it in voting for the Inhofe sense- of-the-Senate amendment? Well, I thought I might even vote for it myself, until I read it. Because if you look at the sense-of-the-Senate amendment by the Senator from Oklahoma, in its findings--in its findings--it says: The American Forces Radio and Television Service and the American Forces Network provide a ``touch of home'' to members of the Armed Forces [et cetera] by providing the same type and quality of radio and television programming . . . that would be available in the continental United States. Well, when AFRTS provides for 100 percent, under 33 local stations around the world, of Rush Limbaugh and Dr. Laura and James Dobson and zero percent on the progressive side, that is hardly ``the same type and quality'' ``available in the continental United States.'' So right away, that is a wrong finding. Another finding is that the: American Forces Radio and Television Service . . . select programming that represents a cross-section of popular American radio and television. Well, again, if 100 percent is on one side and zero is on the other, that also cannot be so. And then in their sense-of-the-Senate amendment it says, it is the sense of the Senate--according to the Senator from Oklahoma--that: [T]he programming mission, themes, and practices of the Department of Defense with respect to its television and radio programming have fairly and responsively fulfilled their mission of providing a ``touch of home'' to members of the Armed Forces. . . . Well, they have fairly and responsively fulfilled their mission when it is 100 percent to nothing? I do not think so. Lastly, the Inhofe amendment says the Secretary of Defense may appoint an ombudsman--``may''--but it does not say what the ombudsman is supposed to do. Now, to be clear, again, what our amendment does is it simply takes the DOD directive--which says they shall provide a free flow of political programming, that there should be the same equal opportunity for balance, and that they should provide them with fairness--and codifies it. We take that directive and codify it. That is all. We do not change it, we codify it. Then we set up an ombudsman and spell out what that ombudsman should do. And we spell that out in my amendment. So there is quite a bit of difference. Again, I remind my fellow Senators that a year and a half ago, I offered a sense-of-the-Senate resolution because I thought if we gently prodded them and showed them what they were doing, they would follow their directive. That was 16 months ago. Now, 16 months later, it is 100 percent to nothing. There is zero programing on the progressive side. Again, I want to make it clear we are not trying to restrict or in any way say what they have to carry, but as long as they are carrying this talk radio, it ought to at least be balanced. Some people say: Well, Rush Limbaugh has a big audience. He does. I don't deny that. But they are carrying Dr. Laura, they are carrying a Mark Merrill, whom I have never heard of. Why don't they carry Howard Stern? Howard Stern has 8 million listeners. Well, in that case, they said they do not like the content. So it is not just ratings, it is also content. They are keeping the Armed Forces personnel from listening to Howard Stern. So it is not just ratings. Don't fall for that line. It is not because Limbaugh and these people have high ratings. Howard Stern has high ratings, but they won't let him on. So I hope Senators will oppose the Inhofe amendment and support our amendment to codify it and to set up an ombudsman who would report to the Secretary of Defense and report to us every year on how they are meeting their requirements of fair and balanced programming. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor, suggest the absence of a quorum, and I ask unanimous consent that the time be run on both sides.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I wonder if the Senator from Oklahoma could advise this Senator as to where in the directive--perhaps there is someplace I haven't found--it says that radio programs that are carried by American Forces Radio around the world have to be syndicated and have a million listeners.

Mr. HARKIN. With all due respect, I asked the Senator, can he show me anywhere where that is written down?

Mr. HARKIN. I just respond by saying they said that 16 months ago. They said it 16 months ago, and nothing has happened.

Mr. HARKIN

Mr. HARKIN. I will just take a couple more minutes and then I will yield the floor.

Mr. HARKIN. As long as there is no one else in the Chamber--if anyone comes here, I would yield the floor to whoever would want it. Let me go through again what this amendment does for Senators who may be watching from their offices. The ombudsman would be appointed by the Secretary of Defense for a term of 5 years. They could not engage in any prebroadcast censorship. The ombudsman would conduct regular reviews of the integrity, balance, and fairness of American forces radio programming. It would respond to programming issues raised by AFR's audience regarding the network's programming and refer complaints to American forces radio management for response. The ombudsman would make suggestions to American forces radio management regarding ways to correct imbalances, and the ombudsman would prepare and present an annual report to the Secretary of Defense and Congress on whether American Forces Radio is satisfying its mandate to provide fair and balanced political programming. So that is what the ombudsman basically would do under our amendment, not censor or anything like that. Basically, he would take complaints, pass it on to management, issue a report to us every year on whether the programming is fair and balanced, and any other comments and criticisms that may come into the ombudsman's office. So that is basically the amendment. I have had my say on it. I think it is pretty clear. I thank the Senator from Michigan for his support. I hope all Senators could support this amendment. As the Senator from Michigan said, it just codifies what is basically a directive right now. It just makes it more clear to DOD, from the Secretary of Defense on down, that we mean it when we say it has to be fair and balanced. We do not mean to take anyone off the air or shut anyone up, but we do mean to have it fair and balanced to represent the diversity of views of America. Not all Americans agree with Rush Limbaugh. Not all Americans agree with Ed Schultz or Jim Hightower or me or anyone else, but we do have diversity. That is what is so wonderful about our country. That is what we are proud of as Americans, that we are able to speak our minds and have our opinions heard and we do not have any censorship. Since we do not have it here, we should not have it on the American Forces Radio network, either. I believe having served myself for a long time in the military, as I know the Senator from Virginia has, too, our troops are well educated. They are smarter today than they ever were even when I was in the military. They know how to listen to one side or the other, and they should have that opportunity. That is all we are asking for. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HARKIN. I thought I had 14 minutes 30 seconds. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business. There is no one else on the floor, so I do not want to use up my time. I ask unanimous consent for up to 10 minutes in morning business so I may yield some time to whoever wants it.

Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Senator.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I say to my friend from Virginia, he is a very thoughtful individual. I know he is fair and always has been fair. To air commentary of the nature I discussed earlier--that which Mr. Limbaugh made about Abu Ghraib--with absolutely no counterbalance or rebuttal, sends entirely the wrong message to our troops. Last year when we had the sense-of-the-Senate resolution--this was posted on CNN.com; they carried an article on it--Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Allison Barber said: It's not about conservative or liberal, it is about the full selection of radio programming based on popularity---- Here in the States. That is ratings. Still, Howard Stern has millions of fans, and his show is not sent to the troops. Barber explains: His issue is one of content that is not appropriate. They say it is popularity, but then they decide whether it is appropriate. Are we to believe that the Abu Ghraib comments by Mr. Limbaugh are excusable because of the high ratings his show receives? I partially agree with the Deputy Assistant Secretary's statement. It appears that content is sometimes a factor in deciding which commentaries to run on American Forces Radio. At the same time, I also agree with the directive DoD already has in place. There should be fairness and balance in political programming on American Forces Radio. To use commercial market share ratings as an excuse not to offer fair and balanced programming will no longer suffice. When there are 33 stations around the globe, and they do not even carry 1 minute of an alternative to Rush Limbaugh, that has to say something. That it is not just ratings. Something else is going on there. One would think that at least they would carry the 15 percent that is offered. They do not even carry that, if the Senator knows what I mean. The 33 stations around the world were offered 15 percent progressive talk radio a week. They are offered it, but they do not carry any of it. So something is going on out there. I do not know what it is, but something is.

Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Senator from Virginia. If anyone shows up to talk on something else, I will obviously yield the floor. But I would yield to the distinguished minority ranking member of the committee whatever time he desires.

Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be laid aside, and I call up an amendment I have pending at the desk.